- Many of the Federal Data Protection Commissioner’s recommendations were examined, discussed and in some cases adopted; however, there are no complete statistics on their implementation.
- Deviations are mainly based on different considerations and the use of discretionary powers in accordance with the FADP; Biga will put the Internet file back into operation until data protection is improved.
Submitted text
The 4th Activity Report of the Federal Data Protection Commissioner 1996/97 shows that various recommendations, especially in the judicial and police sectors (e.g. with regard to the DOSIS system), are not being followed.
I therefore ask the Federal Council:
1. which recommendations of the Federal Data Protection Commissioner have not been taken into account?
2 Why did this not happen in detail?
3. how are the latest complaints of the data protection officer in the area of Biga handled and implemented?
<
h1>Answer of the Federal Council
<
h1>
1. for the time being, a distinction must be made between “official” recommendations issued by the Federal Data Protection Commissioner (FDPIC) on the basis of Article 27 paragraph 4 of the Data Protection Act (DPA) and the recommendations issued by the FDPIC in his opinions on federal decrees and measures (Article 31 paragraph 1 letter b DPA). The activity reports of the EDPS show that he issued 824 such opinions to federal bodies from 1 July 1993 to 31 March 1997. Each of these opinions contained numerous suggestions, so that the number of such recommendations made by the EDPS during the period mentioned reaches several thousand. Neither the federal administration nor the EDPS keeps statistics on how these recommendations have been followed up. The recommendations of the EDPS are subjected to an in-depth examination and discussed with him before they are accepted in whole or in part or, in the event of disagreement, submitted to the competent department or the Federal Council for evaluation. In the requests to the Federal Council, the departments report any differences with the SDPC. The recommendations on the DOSIS information system referred to in the inquiry have been recommendations of this type. It should also be noted that the DOSIS ordinance of 26 June 1996 was subject to a partial revision on 19 November 1997 in the course of the enactment of a general enforcement ordinance to the Federal Act of 7 October 1994 on the Central Criminal Police Offices of the Confederation. The preparation of this partial revision was welcomed by the SDPC and accompanied from a technical point of view.
Between July 1, 1993 and May 31, 1997, the EDPS issued seven “official” recommendations in application of Article 27(4) FADP. Two of these have been accepted without reservation by the federal offices concerned. One recommendation has been rejected on only one point, which the SDPC has submitted to the relevant departments for a decision. Four other recommendations have been rejected in their entirety and submitted to the competent departments for a decision. The departmental decisions have confirmed the view of the offices with regard to the most important points in dispute; however, they have approved certain proposals of the EDPS which had previously been rejected by the offices.
2. the reason for most of the differences between the EDPS and the Federal Council are different views on the balancing of conflicting interests. In all cases where the Federal Council or the federal administration have not followed the recommendations of the EDPS, they have exhausted a discretionary power granted to them by the DPA.
The operation of the Internet file of anonymous jobseeker profiles, which represents a central pillar of the legally anchored cooperation between the public and private employment services (cf. Art. 85 para. 1 let. a and Art. 85b para. 2 Avig as well as Art. 33 para. 2 AVG), was discontinued until further notice at the beginning of October 1997 due to problems in the areas of data protection and access security.
The Federal Council considers this form of cooperation between the public and private employment services to be important and expedient in order to efficiently support job seekers in their search for employment. It has therefore instructed the Biga to put the Internet file back into operation once the problems in the areas mentioned have been resolved. The Biga is currently holding talks with the relevant federal agencies and the SDPC regarding data protection and access security. Technical measures to improve access security have been identified and their implementation has been initiated.